Barack Obama: “Under my plan of a cap-and-trade system, electricity rates would necessarily skyrocket.” (scene from Take Back Your Power)On January 17, 2008, President Barack Obama famously said, “Under my plan of a cap-and-trade system, electricity rates would necessarily skyrocket.”[1] It’s now clear that the so-called “smart” utility meter is the core culprit technology in the scheme to which Obama was referring. But this is just the tip of the rather alarming iceberg unveiled in our new feature film Take Back Your Power (www.takebackyourpower.net).

Billions of tax dollars… no benefits?

European Commission wants another $700 Billion for smart grid upgrades. (scene from Take Back Your Power)In a time of economic crisis, the US government allocated $11 billion from taxpayer funds[2] from the 2009 bailout package to develop a “smart” grid, including “smart” meters for every home’s electricity, gas and water. And recently, the European Union has announced plans to spend a mind-numbing $700 billion on building out this centralized control grid.[3] The stated reasons for “smart” metering and grid technology:

to save energy and thus aid the environment;to increase power reliability; andto give you more control of energy use in your own home.

Project Censored: Wireless Technology a Looming Health Crisis

It’s official: “Wireless Technology a Looming Health Crisis” is the #14 story in the new 2013 edition of the book, ‘Project Censored’, which covers the top 25 New Stories of the year that are the most important but least reported by corporate media.

14. Wireless Technology a Looming Health CrisisAs a multitude of hazardous wireless technologies are deployed in homes schools and workplaces government officials and industry representatives continue to insist on their safety despite growing evidence to the contrary…

After several teachers at
Malibu High School reported they have thyroid cancer and others reported other
maladies, officials began testing the campus for carcinogens. Adrian Arambulo
reports for the NBC4 News at Noon on Monday, Oct. 7, 2013.

Malibu High School students
and staff returned to campus Monday for the first time since learning that some
classrooms are being tested for contamination that some fear could be a cause
of recent cancer diagnoses for several teachers.

Three teachers who work in
the same building have recently been diagnosed with thyroid cancer. Others have
reported thyroid problems. Some have skin rashes and have lost their hair.

District officials said they
have hired an Arcadia engineering firm to look closer at classroom conditions,
interview the sick teachers and check into a report showing contaminated soil
was removed from campus three years ago.

“We will do everything we
can to make sure our teachers and students continue to be safe again,” said
Jerry Block, the Malibu High principal, adding he expects the test results back
soon. “We have no reason to believe they're not safe right now.”

Parents dropping off their
kids on Monday were not only worried about the sick teachers but also their
children.

“I worry because I just
heard it on the radio and I don't know what happened,” said parent Nery Godoy.

Carrie Krase is so concerned
she is pulling her two kids out of class, at least until she gets more answers.

“You start looking at your
own kids,” she said. “You know they had that stomache ache. They had that
headache. You start to think your children must be affected as well.”

She says the school and the
district have a lot of work to do to make her feel like her kids are safe.

Sandra Lyon, the
superintendent of the Santa Monica-Malibu Unified School District, said she
wouldn’t have opened the campus if she thought conditions were not safe.

“At this point we don't have
any reason to believe it is not a safe building,” she said.

But parents want the
district to be sure.

So some are forming a group
to demand answers and accountability.

“They're wonderful teachers.
We need to protect them and take care of them,” said Laureen Sills, a parent.

B.C.’s independent power regulator won’t be allowed to reject smart meter opt-out fees, nor can it go back and investigate the validity of the controversial program, according to a special order from the province’s energy minister.

Bill Bennett issued the directive to the B.C. Utilities Commission in advance of B.C. Hydro’s application for smart meter fees, expected in the next few weeks.

The order limits the commission to focusing entirely on whether the fees, up to $35 a month, are fair. The commission retains its ability to lower the fees if it sees fit, but not eliminate them entirely or make any changes to how Hydro runs the smart meter program.

“We, frankly, did not want the BCUC to be tempted to go back and revisit that decision from several years ago, so we circumscribed what we wanted them to do, which is focus on the decision today,” Bennett said in an interview with the Times Colonist.

Hydro has told customers it intends to charge $35 a month to anyone who refuses a new wireless smart meter and wants to keep an old analog device.

Customers can also choose to pay $100 to have the smart meter wireless transmitter disabled, and an additional $20 a month to have it manually read by Hydro.

Hydro wants the fees to begin in December, but, under law, must get approval from the utilities commission to impose extra charges on customers.

Bennett’s special directive strips the commission of the power to reject the fees, and says it must not do anything to interfere in the smart meter program, meter installations or the opt-out provisions.

Instead, the commission “must ensure that the rates allow the authority to collect sufficient revenue in each fiscal year” to cover costs for smart meters, radio-off meters and old analog meters.

The commission should focus on examining whether Hydro’s opt-out fees are fair, and not allow it to examine whether the $1-billion program should have been launched in 2010, Bennett said.

Government sets energy policy and projects like smart meters, while the commission’s role is to look at rates, said Bennett.

The smart meters are designed to modernize the power grid by wirelessly transmitting usage information directly to B.C. Hydro.

But 60,000 customers have refused the devices, complaining about aggressive installers and health concerns from wireless transmissions.

After considerable public pressure, Hydro agreed to the opt-out program in July. It has argued the fees, which amount to as much as $420 a year per customer, are necessary to cover extra costs and manual meter readings.

Bennett said he asked Hydro tough questions when it first approached him with the fees.

“The first question I asked [Hydro] was, OK, where did you get these numbers from?” said Bennett. “I made it very clear to Hydro that you guys better be damn sure you aren’t padding these costs, that they are real costs.”

The entire smart meter program is a “billion-dollar boondoggle” that should have been examined by the utilities commission years ago, said NDP energy critic John Horgan.

He called the restrictions Bennett has imposed on the commission “a shame and a farce.”

“It’s an embarrassment,” Horgan said. “If I was a commissioner of the utilities commission, I would resign.”

Can Mobile Phones Cause Brain Tumors?

U.K. Acoustic Neuroma Link Fades Away

After Data from 2009-11 Added

October 6, 2013

Last updated

October 8, 2013

The research group at the University of Oxford that reported a link between long-term use of a mobile phone and an elevated risk of acoustic neuroma (AN) in May now says that it is no longer there. In a short letter to the International Journal of Epidemiology (IJE), the Oxford team advises that when the analysis was repeated with data from 2009-2011, "there is no longer a significant association." Also gone, the team writes, is the "significant trend in risk with duration of use."

Absorbed device users oblivious to danger

Vivian Ho

Updated 10:46 pm, Monday, October 7, 2013

Brandon Long (right) is among the many commuters using smartphones on the way to work on a Muni train stopping at San Francisco's Powell Street Station on Friday. Photo: Liz Hafalia, The Chronicle

A man standing on a crowded Muni train pulls out a .45-caliber pistol.

He raises the gun, pointing it across the aisle, before tucking it back against his side. He draws it out several more times, once using the hand holding the gun to wipe his nose. Dozens of passengers stand and sit just feet away - but none reacts.

Their eyes, focused on smartphones and tablets, don't lift until the gunman fires a bullet into the back of a San Francisco State student getting off the train.

For police and prosecutors, the details of the case were troubling - they believe the suspect had been out "hunting" for a stranger to kill - but so too was the train passengers' collective inattention to imminent danger.

"These weren't concealed movements - the gun is very clear," said District AttorneyGeorge Gascón. "These people are in very close proximity with him, and nobody sees this. They're just so engrossed, texting and reading and whatnot. They're completely oblivious of their surroundings."

Gascón said what happened on the light-rail car speaks to a larger dilemma of the digital age. As glowing screens dominate the public sphere, people seem more and more inclined to become engrossed, whether they are in a car or a train or are strolling through an intersection.

"When you used to go into a public place, you assumed everyone was in that place with you," said Jack Nasar, an Ohio State University professor in city and regional planning who specializes in environmental psychology. "What happens to public places when everybody is talking on a cell phone? Everyone is somewhere else.

"Someone can take a gun, hold it up, and nobody will notice it."

Missing cues

Nasar has been studying the dangers of cell phone distractions for nearly a decade. For a 2008 study, he and his research team planted objects such as a sign reading "UNSAFE!" and fake vomit on a stretch of sidewalk, and instructed 60 people to walk the path.

Those talking on cell phones were far more likely to miss the cues, he said, results that mimicked the findings of studies of distracted drivers.

The implications are nothing new for Bay Area police officials, who say smartphone thefts have become an epidemic not only because the devices are valuable, but because the victims are preoccupied.

"Oftentimes when you interview people who get their phones stolen, when you ask them to describe where the person came from, what he was wearing, they have no idea," said San Francisco Police Chief Greg Suhr. "It's not uncommon to read in a police report that a person 'came out of nowhere' or 'I didn't see where he came from.' "

Suhr said 2 out of 3 robberies in the city involve smartphones.

Phones can help, hinder

Both Suhr and Gascón want to strike a balance in the use of technology. They acknowledge that the ubiquity of smartphones - the videos and photos they capture, and the quick communication they allow - often helps catch criminals.

"I'm not going to say we don't appreciate the cell phone videos that we have gotten on so many occasions that have helped us solve crimes," Suhr said. "But it makes people so incredibly vulnerable to crime. And the inattention, which creates this tremendous vulnerability to people, is just something that's so easily corrected."

The advice from police is simple - pull out cell phones less, pay attention more. It's a mantra San Francisco State police officers have been spreading around campus since the Sept. 23 shooting, said student Jordan Sanchez, 17.

Sanchez spoke as he waited for a Muni train, after pausing to look up from his phone. Like many passengers around him, he said he didn't think the way he used the device in public put him in danger.

"When you're bored and there's nothing to do, you go on your phone," he said.

The Weekly Buzz on EMF Radiation

saferemr.com - “With regard to investigating the association between cell phone use and subsequent tumor risk (which was not the primary purpose of the “million women” study), this study had several major shortco...

Given that it’s Breast Cancer Awareness Month, Dr. Paul Michael, of Comprehensive Cancer Centers of Nevada, wants you to hear it again in relation to cellphones and the disease that still strikes more than 230,000 women each year.

Even though he stresses serious research on cellphone radiation and breast cancer is in its infancy and there is no conclusive evidence linking the two, the former American Cancer Society board member says “it’s not a good idea” for anyone concerned about getting the disease to risk doing what many young women consider hip today — tucking an active cellphone into their bra while they drive, jog, shop or sit in movie theaters.

For years, he said, scientists have been studying — basically in relation to brain cancer — the form of energy given off by cellphones known as radiofrequency waves, a type of nonionizing radiation that the International Agency for Research on Cancer has classified as “possibly carcinogenic to humans.”

Because all expert agencies agree that evidence of a possible link between cellphones and cancer is limited and more research is needed to look at possible long term effects — a kind of “maybe” conclusion that often becomes easy for some to dismiss — Michael suggested that warnings by cellphone manufacturers themselves should make women more cautious about where they carry and use cellphones.

“They put in their instruction manuals that people shouldn’t have the phones touching them,” he said.

It’s in the fine print, but it’s there. An Apple iPhone 4 warning reads: “When using iPhone near your body for voice calls or for wireless data transmission over a cellular network, keep iPhone at least 15 mm (5/8 inch) away from the body, and only use carrying cases, belt clips or holders that do not have metal parts and that maintain at least 15 mm (5/8 inch) separation between iPhone and the body.”

If that distance isn’t kept, the warning continues, “guidelines for self-exposure can be exceeded.”

(Apple spokesmen have consistently noted that the iPhone’s radio-frequency energy is well within the limits set by the Federal Communications Commission and governing agencies of other countries.)

Motorola warns W180 phone users to keep the active device one full inch away from their body, if not using a company approved “clip holder, holster, case or body harness.”

What has caused cancer prevention activists to start looking more at possible linkage between cellphones and breast cancer is the work of Devra Davis, the founding director of the center for environmental oncology at the University of Pittsburgh Cancer Institute as well as the founder of Environmental Health Trust and the author of “DISCONNECT: The Truth About Cellphone Radiation.”

“Experimental studies show that cellphone radiation accelerates the growth of breast cancer cells,” she wrote.

Davis supports women using a headset or speakerphone with a cellphone, which the American Cancer Society says substantially reduces radiation exposure, as does holding a cellphone away from the body.

As she pushes for more research, Davis shares the stories of women, including Tiffany Frantz of Pennsylvania, who says she developed breast cancer at a spot where she kept her cellphone in her bra against her bare skin 12 hours a day. At 21, she underwent a mastectomy on her left breast.

Though he admits that what he calls “anecdotal evidence” can be powerful, medical oncologist Michael won’t allow himself to say there is a definite linkage between breast cancer and cellphones carried in bras.

That connection, he said, can only be definitively made with a study that follows many women.

Still, in the absence of scientific proof, Michael understands that what happened to Frantz and others like her may cause parents to caution their daughters about where they’re carrying their cellphones.

That, he said, would be a good thing.

“I don’t know if cellphones carried next to the breast cause cancer,” he said. “Not all radiofrequency waves cause cancer. But I do know from a recent study that young women are getting more aggressive and larger tumors than older women. Is that because of diet, pollution, cellphones or whatever? I don’t know. But we also know the people who make cellphones say they shouldn’t be carried that way. I think we know enough about this to say it’s better to be safe than sorry when it comes to where you’re carrying your cellphone.”

Paul Harasim is the medical writer for the Las Vegas Review-Journal. His column appears Mondays. Harasim can be reached at pharasim@reviewjournal.com or 702-387-2908.

Google Translate

4G : the electrosensitive demand the application of the precautionary principle

The day of the launch of 4G , three associations ( Priartém , Collective electro , Acting for the Environment ) is still calling for studies on the dangers of the waves on the population.

Pascal Samama01netle 01/10/13 15h21

TThe October 1 will remain a historic day in telecommunications. That was the day that the 4G was first launched by Bouygues Telecom. For many, this standard is a technological and commercial event uses and offer new opportunities for the digital economy.

For others, it remains a public health concern . This is what that estimate three associations ( Priartém , Collective electro , Acting for the Environment ), which returned to the charge in an attempt to reopen a case that they are impatient to see addressed by the competent authorities in the namely the Ministry of Health . On the home page of his site, not a word on the subject. You must use the search engine to access information from 2009 . Since then, there is silence .

" No study of health impact "

In a statement sent to the October 1 , the three associations want to hear another voice . For them, "no health impact study was carried out on the 4G despite signals risks and recurrent complaints of antennas and electro- residents, and only fifteen days before the release of the update the risk assessment to RF by the National Agency for Food Safety and the environment, this episode reveals once again the dominance of economic issues in managing the case of mobile phones . "

For Sophie Pelletier , head of collective Electrosensitive there was "two weights, two measures". This " electro " , no study has been conducted on the impacts faced by people living close to the antennas .

"We have studies that show the effects of waves are not as harmless as they say ," said Mrs. Pelletier suggesting we work Ineris (National Institute for Industrial Environment and Risks) and the University of Picardie Jules Verne in Amiens.

In 2012, these two institutions have exposed young rats at a frequency of 900 MHz at a power of 1 volt / meter. The animals developed abnormalities such as splitting REM sleep disturbances in thermoregulation and increased appetite . For 4G frequencies are 800 and 2600 MHz in 1800 .

For Fleur Pellerin , studies are contradictory

For associations , apply a precautionary approach. "This is important at a time when smartphones are everywhere and touch pads come in schools ," said Sophie Pelletier calls to implement a " public health policy ." It recalls that the electro are only part of the problem. " The disease may affect others. , " She says .

For the moment , if the Ministry of Health is discrete , one of the Digital Economy attempts to reassure . In January , Fleur Pellerin spoke of studies on the subject. "They are contradictory and there is no question of playing with irrational fears to stop the deployment of 4G. Do not oppose the economy and ecology. " She also added that it is necessary to continue research for more certainty ," but pointed out that 4G is an important issue . "It represents an investment of $ 3 billion over five years and tens of thousands of jobs . "

Follow by Email

Followers

About Me

While I have always been extremely health conscious and am presently in excellent health, I did become temporarily out-of-commission (i.e. I was really sick) in 2005 with a number of at the time unexplainable symptoms. I was quite puzzled at the time because I had been eating mainly organically grown food, drinking spring water, doing Yoga every morning, and going to the gym several times a week. In other words, I was doing everything one is supposed to do to stay healthy. I was not supposed to get sick. It took me six months before discovering or even imagining the main source of the problem - which was in fact "overexposure to electromagnetic" - especially microwave - radiation. I was living within 200 meters of two cell phone towers at the time and within 500 meters of a 3rd one with numerous WiFi signals bleeding into my apartment from adjacent neighbors. I developed a host of symptoms, which are found in what has been misleadingly described as Chronic Fatigue Syndrome (CFS) -- but much more accurately described as Radio Wave or Microwave Sickness. Large numbers of people in the USA suddenly started getting sick in 1984...